|
|
|
I'm keeping my 2-channel player for it's excellent 16-bit and SACD stereo playback, (for those less-than-stellar surround mixes), but I've decided to add surround as well for a couple of reasons: 1)Your testimonials with regards to surround, 2) the fact that even in surround I can still use my "high-end" stereo amp to power the L and R channels. (Right?*) 3)Sony's $250 Universal player got rave reviews with reviews with regards to SACD playback, so why not at that price? 4)Tallis' Spem in Allium.... So I'll by a Universal and a 5.1 channel amp. (Or a 3.1?)
*By plugging L and R outputs of the universal player into the L and R aux of my high-end amp and using a modest surround amp to power center, sub, and rears?
A minor concern: I wish that I could amplify my sub with the good amp during surround playback but that's impossible isn't it.
A larger concern: Center Channel. I would like a Vandersteen center channel, as my L and R and Sub are Vandys. Will different amps running different channels cause balance issues? How important is the center channel? It's not discreet like the rears is it?
A minor concern: Back speakers. Probably don't need full-range. Most antiphonal music is treble anyway--brass or voice. How big should they be? Being discreet, how little could I spend?
John
|
|
|
Post by nickc April 27, 2004 (2 of 21)
|
|
jdaniel@jps.net said:
I'm keeping my 2-channel player for it's excellent 16-bit and SACD stereo playback, (for those less-than-stellar surround mixes), but I've decided to add surround as well for a couple of reasons: 1)Your testimonials with regards to surround, 2) the fact that even in surround I can still use my "high-end" stereo amp to power the L and R channels. (Right?*) 3)Sony's $250 Universal player got rave reviews with reviews with regards to SACD playback, so why not at that price? 4)Tallis' Spem in Allium.... So I'll by a Universal and a 5.1 channel amp. (Or a 3.1?)
*By plugging L and R outputs of the universal player into the L and R aux of my high-end amp and using a modest surround amp to power center, sub, and rears?
A minor concern: I wish that I could amplify my sub with the good amp during surround playback but that's impossible isn't it.
A larger concern: Center Channel. I would like a Vandersteen center channel, as my L and R and Sub are Vandys. Will different amps running different channels cause balance issues? How important is the center channel? It's not discreet like the rears is it?
A minor concern: Back speakers. Probably don't need full-range. Most antiphonal music is treble anyway--brass or voice. How big should they be? Being discreet, how little could I spend?
John
well done john you won't regret the change! i think if you can keep the centre speaker as close to your main fronts it would be best.i'm not sure that the different amplification is a huge problem but of course i stand to be corrected on that one. you don't need to spend "much" :) on rear speakers; they generally only convey venue ambience. they don't carry any real bass either so bookshelf are fine.
best of luck
nick
ps i forgot to add: you'll sometimes find "bad" multi-channel recordings (too much reverberation, too much reflection in rear-channels etc.)just like there are "bad" stereo recordings. The thing is is that 90% of MC is so much better than the best stereo you'll find it hard to go back to stereo...
good listening
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't totally agree with the last post, rear channels (SACD) don't just carry reverb, but it all goes back to what you listen to. For SACD I listen to everything from Yo-Yo Ma and Miles, to Aerosmith and Rap and R&B, on SACD! Oh no!
R&B and the one rap album on SACD mix full range sounds into the rear for some tracks, so much so that if I turned off the front channels, I could totally groove on just the rears. I just sold all of my speakers on ebay, and this time, my rears will be towers, but low cost two ways, thinking about KEF's or something similar. I'll spend the big bucks for the front L,R and center.
As for being discreet, every channel in SACD playback is totally and completely discreet. Also, don't buy into the center channel not handling a lot of bass, lots of titles for whatever reason have vocals and usually bass lines in the center. My old center couldn't really handle the lows, so I will take that into account before I put my money down on a center. My last center was rated only down to 80hz and I was never happy with the SACD side of things. Next time around, I'd probably prefer a center that is rated down to at least the 50-55hz range if not lower.
If you listen to mostly "audiophile" SACDs, like classical, you can probably forget most of what I just wrote.
- Tony
http://www.StrangerSoundLabs.com
|
|
|
Post by nickc April 29, 2004 (4 of 21)
|
|
sound_labs said:
I don't totally agree with the last post, rear channels (SACD) don't just carry reverb, but it all goes back to what you listen to. For SACD I listen to everything from Yo-Yo Ma and Miles, to Aerosmith and Rap and R&B, on SACD! Oh no!
R&B and the one rap album on SACD mix full range sounds into the rear for some tracks, so much so that if I turned off the front channels, I could totally groove on just the rears. I just sold all of my speakers on ebay, and this time, my rears will be towers, but low cost two ways, thinking about KEF's or something similar. I'll spend the big bucks for the front L,R and center.
As for being discreet, every channel in SACD playback is totally and completely discreet. Also, don't buy into the center channel not handling a lot of bass, lots of titles for whatever reason have vocals and usually bass lines in the center. My old center couldn't really handle the lows, so I will take that into account before I put my money down on a center. My last center was rated only down to 80hz and I was never happy with the SACD side of things. Next time around, I'd probably prefer a center that is rated down to at least the 50-55hz range if not lower.
If you listen to mostly "audiophile" SACDs, like classical, you can probably forget most of what I just wrote.
- Tony
http://www.StrangerSoundLabs.com
you're right tony i should have made it clear i only listen to classical so full range rears are not really required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
A follow-up: Most fellow listeners I've chatted with since first posting do *not* suggest blending systems by adding a 3.1 to a two channel amp and using them both for surround. Messy. I've decided just to build the most "musical" home theater system I can, since that was next on the agenda anyway. I'm looking at the Definitive Technology Mythos series with half-length towers in the back for my antiphonal needs. Gramophone, auditioning with classical music, considers their products musical. NAD offers a reasonably priced surround receiver at $1299. (I looked at high-end surround receivers--damn!$$$)
The NAD: http://www.theperfectvision.com/newsletter/tpv49/nad_t762.html
The Def Tech Mythos: http://www.definitivetech.com/loudspeakers/mythos/mythos.html
If any of you have had experience with these, and *how they handle Classical* please let me know what you think.
John
|
|
|
Post by Castor April 29, 2004 (6 of 21)
|
|
jdaniel@jps.net said:
A follow-up: Most fellow listeners I've chatted with since first posting do *not* suggest blending systems by adding a 3.1 to a two channel amp and using them both for surround. Messy.
John
John,
I did not want my excellent Meridian 2 channel set-up for CD and SACD compromised by the introduction of MC sound, whether for SACD or DVD.
I have found that the Yamaha DSP-E800 is excellent for the centre and rear channels.It is not in any way messy to use and does the job well at minimum cost. I can't see the point in buying a five or seven channel processor/amp to use just for MC and ignore one's main stereo system. The Yamaha only delivers 70 wpc but this seems more than adequate for the rear ambient sound from most classical SACDs. See http://www.homecinemachoice.com/testbench/frame.html?http://www.homecinemachoice.com/testbench/Processors/Yamaha/YamahaDSP-E800.shtml
|
|
|
Post by nickc April 29, 2004 (7 of 21)
|
|
jdaniel@jps.net said:
A follow-up: Most fellow listeners I've chatted with since first posting do *not* suggest blending systems by adding a 3.1 to a two channel amp and using them both for surround. Messy. I've decided just to build the most "musical" home theater system I can, since that was next on the agenda anyway. I'm looking at the Definitive Technology Mythos series with half-length towers in the back for my antiphonal needs. Gramophone, auditioning with classical music, considers their products musical. NAD offers a reasonably priced surround receiver at $1299. (I looked at high-end surround receivers--damn!$$$)
The NAD: http://www.theperfectvision.com/newsletter/tpv49/nad_t762.html
The Def Tech Mythos: http://www.definitivetech.com/loudspeakers/mythos/mythos.html
If any of you have had experience with these, and *how they handle Classical* please let me know what you think.
John
john
i have a marantz sr7300 amp, why don't you try and maybe listen to the current model, the sr7400? it is reasonably priced and i have always been happy with the sound in all modes with the marantz (reviewers also say they think marantz amps are "musical" whatever that means!)
good listening
nick
|
|
|
|
|
|
Castor said:
John,
I did not want my excellent Meridian 2 channel set-up for CD and SACD compromised by the introduction of MC sound, whether for SACD or DVD.
I have found that the Yamaha DSP-E800 is excellent for the centre and rear channels.It is not in any way messy to use and does the job well at minimum cost. I can't see the point in buying a five or seven channel processor/amp to use just for MC and ignore one's main stereo system. The Yamaha only delivers 70 wpc but this seems more than adequate for the rear ambient sound from most classical SACDs. See http://www.homecinemachoice.com/testbench/frame.html?http://www.homecinemachoice.com/testbench/Processors/Yamaha/YamahaDSP-E800.shtml
Now this is very interesting. Do you have a sub hooked up to your 2-channel amp? If so, can you leave the sub plugged in to the 2-channel *and* the Yamaha outboard at the same time, or does one need an A/B switch?
|
|
|
Post by nickc April 30, 2004 (9 of 21)
|
|
jdaniel@jps.net said:
Now this is very interesting. Do you have a sub hooked up to your 2-channel amp? If so, can you leave the sub plugged in to the 2-channel *and* the Yamaha outboard at the same time, or does one need an A/B switch?
sorry something i forgot further to my previous post. the marantz (or any "mid" range av receiver) has pre-outs for all channels for if one wishes to use a separate power amp. you could still use your excellent stereo amp routed through the surround amp and just use the surround amp for your center and rear channels. thus your original stereo amp would still be driving the front left and right channels.
|
|
|
Post by Castor April 30, 2004 (10 of 21)
|
|
jdaniel@jps.net said:
Now this is very interesting. Do you have a sub hooked up to your 2-channel amp? If so, can you leave the sub plugged in to the 2-channel *and* the Yamaha outboard at the same time, or does one need an A/B switch?
I have a REL sub. and the LFE output from the Yamaha is fed into this. The level can be set by adjusting the control for the LFE on the REL. However, REL recommend also connecting a cable (supplied) from the main amplifier speaker terminals to the HIGH LEVEL input of the REL. Again this can be adjusted, this time using the separate control for the HIGH LEVEL input. What this means in practice is that the sub. is on all the time connected to the 2-channel amp. but only receives LFE information from the Yamaha only when this is present.
As REL state in their instruction booklet " This is a feature of real benefit if you wish to play music in stereo mode in the purist audiophile way and in full 5.1 digital mode. True flexibility"
Hope this helps John
|
|
